Wild Sky bill sparks passionate debate

Critics say proposed area isn't wilderness

Matthew Daly, The Associated Press

Published 10:00 pm, Wednesday, June 4, 2003

WASHINGTON -- A bill to create a wilderness area on 106,000 acres northeast of Seattle would protect wildlife and promote clean water and recreational opportunities, supporters said yesterday at a public hearing.

But opponents decried the proposal as unnecessary and even destructive. Much of the area targeted for protection is not even wilderness, they said, adding that the plan had not received enough scrutiny as powerful lawmakers try to ram it through Congress.

The proposed Wild Sky Wilderness, on land north of U.S. 2 in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest, would be the first new wilderness area in Washington state since 1984.

The measure is being pushed by Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., and Rep. Rick Larsen, D-Wash., after efforts by both lawmakers to get a similar bill approved last year.

The Senate approved the Wild Sky bill in November, but the measure was not taken up in the House.

All the groups have signed off on the bill as it has been modified over many months, Murray said.

"I want to stress how long my colleagues and I have been working on this issue and how much it has been in the public spotlight," she told the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee. At least three public meetings have been held on the proposal in Washington state and the proposal has been the subject of dozens of news articles and commentary, she said.

Murray and other supporters listed a host of benefits, including protection of wildlife such as bears, wolverines, bald eagles, spotted owls and deer, as well promoting clean, cool water for salmon, steelhead and trout.

"People looking for easy and quick access to nature in its purest form will see Wild Sky as a destination," Murray said, noting that Wild Sky is within a two-hour drive for more than 2.5 million people.